PDF herunterladen
Arthritis und Rheuma 2006; 26(05): 312-318
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1620076
Orthopädische Chirurgie
Schattauer GmbH

Biometalle in der orthopädischen Chirurgie

Entwicklung, aktueller Stand und PerspektivenBiometals in orthopedic surgeryhistory, current status and perspectives
Clayton N. Kraft
1   Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf, Klinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie (Direktor: Univ.-Prof. Dr. med. R. Krauspe)
,
Lukas Eschbach
2   Robert Mathys Stiftung, Bettlach, Schweiz
,
Peter H. Pennekamp
3   Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms Universität, Bonn, Klinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie (komm. Direktor: Priv.-Doz. Dr. med. A. Schmitz)
,
Beat Gasser
2   Robert Mathys Stiftung, Bettlach, Schweiz
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
23. Dezember 2017 (online)

    Lizenzen und Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Bei nahezu jeder zweiten Operation in der orthopädischen Chirurgie werden Biomaterialien eingebracht, bei etwa jeder dritten Biometalle. Von den kommerziell erhältlichen Materialien sind zum momentanen Zeitpunkt lediglich metallische Werkstoffe in der Lage, der statischen Beanspruchung und der Dauerfestigkeit, die von hoch beanspruchten Werkstücken der internen Stabilisatoren bzw. des künstlichen Gelenkersatzes gefordert werden, gerecht zu werden. Allgemein wird akzeptiert, dass es kaum gelingen wird, einen biologisch vollkommen inerten Werkstoff zu produzieren. Aufgrund der biologischen und mechanischen Anforderungen haben sich im Lauf der vergangenen dreißig Jahre Legierungen auf Basis der Metalle Eisen, Titan und Kobalt durchgesetzt. Inzwischen sind nahezu alle Implantate an ihrer Oberfläche bearbeitet und behandelt. Dieses dient zur Verbesserung der Gewebeverträglichkeit und des Einwachsverhaltens sowie zur Reduzierung von Abrieb. In Zukunft dürfte sich durch Mikrobeschichtungen mit nahezu inerten Materialien oder biologischen „Tarnkappen” die Bioakzeptanz der metallischen Werkstoffe nochmals steigern lassen.

Summary

Biomaterials are used in almost every second procedure in orthopaedic surgery, with biometals being used in approximately every third intervention. Of the commercially available biomaterials, only metals have the fatigue strength to cope with the static force sencountered in highly stressed internal fixations and in joint replacements used in bone surgery, respectively. It is generally accepted that it is virtually impossible to produce an inert biomaterial. Due to the biological and mechanical requirements, alloys based on the metals iron, titanium and cobalt are prevalent in orthopaedic surgery. Virtually all implants are surface treated for improved biocompatibility and bone ingrowth, and also to diminish wear. In the not too distant future, it seems likely that there will be an improvement in the biological acceptance of implants by micro-surfacing with layers of a practically inert material or biological “camouflage”.

Schlüsselwörter

Biometalle - Biomaterialien - Implantatwerkstoffe - orthopädische Chirurgie

Keywords

Biometals - biomaterials - implant materials - orthopedic surgery
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Albrektsson T.. The response of bone to titanium implants. CRC Crit Rev Biocompat 1984; 1: 53-84.
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Black J.. Does corrosion matter. J Bone Joint Surg 1988; 70 [Br] 517-20.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Bouchard PR., Black J., Albrecht BA.. et al. Carcinogenicity of CoCrMo (F-75) implants in the rat. J Biomed Mater Res 1996; 32: 37-44.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Cigada A., Rondelli G., Vincentini B.. et al. Corrosion behaviour of high nitrogen stainless steels for biomedical applications. In Kovacs P., Istephanous NS.. eds Compatibility of Biomedical Implants. New Jersey/Pennington: The Electrochemical Society Inc.; 1994: 185-95.
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Disegi JA., Fairer R.. Torsional properties of Ti-15Mo bone screws. 21st Meeting Soc Biomaterials. San Francisco, USA: 1995
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Disegi JA.. Titanium alloys for fracture fixation implants. Injury 2000; 31: 14-7.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Doran A., Law FC., Allen MJ., Rushton N.. Neoplastic transformation of cells by soluble but not particulate forms of metals used in orthopaedic implants. Biomaterials 1998; 19: 751-9.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Galante JO., Lemons J., Spector M.. et al. The biologic effects of implant materials. J Orthop Res 1991; 9: 760-75.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Gerber HW., Moosmann A., Steinemann S.. Bioactivity of metals. Tissue Tolerance of soluble or solid metal, tested on organ cultured embryonic bone rudiments. In Gerber HW., Moosmann A., Steinemann S.. et al. eds. Technical Principles, Design and Safety of Joint Implants. Toronto, Lewiston, NY, Bern, Göttingen, Stuttgart: Hogrefe and Huber; 1993: 248-54.
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Howie DW., Rogers SD., McGee MA., Haynes DR.. Biologic effects of cobalt chrome in cell and animal models. Clin Orthop Rel Res 1996; 329: 217-32.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Kraft CN., Burian B., Diedrich O.. et al. Microvascular response of striated muscle to common arthroplasty-alloys: a comparative in vivo study with CoCrMo, Ti-6Al-4V and Ti-6Al-7Nb. J Biomed Mater Res 2005 accepted for publication.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Laing PG., Ferguson Jr AB., Hodge ES.. Tissue reaction in rabbit muscle exposed to metallic implants. J Biomed Mater Res 1967; 1: 135-49.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Lalor PA., Revell PA., Gray AB.. et al. Sensitivity to titanium – a cause of implant failure. J Bone Joint Surg 1991; 73 [Br] 25-8.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Marti A.. Cobalt-base alloys used in bone surgery. Injury 2000; 31: 18-21.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Mathys R., Gasser B.. Introduction to materials in bone surgery. Injury 2000; 31: 1-2.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 McKay GC., Macnair R., MacDonald C., Grant MH.. Interactions of orthopaedic metals with an immortalized rat osteoblasts cell line. Biomaterials 1996; 17: 1339-44.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Memoli VA., Urban RM., Alroy J., Galante JO.. Malignant neoplasms associated with orthopaedic implant materials in rats. J Orthop Res 1986; 4: 346-50.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Merritt K., Brown SA.. Effects of metal particles and ions on the biological system. Techniques Orthop 1993; 8: 228-36.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Merx H., Dreinhöfer K., Schräder P.. et al. International variation in hip replacement rates. Ann Rheum Dis 2003; 62: 222-6.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Nyrén O., McLaughlin JK., Gridley G.. et al. Cancer risk after hip replacement with metal implants: a population-based cohort study in Sweden. J Nat Canc Inst 1995; 87: 28-33.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Pohler OEM.. Unalloyed titanium for implants in bone surgery. Injury 2000; 31: 7-13.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Puleo DA., Huh WW.. Acute toxicity of metal ions cultures of osteogenic cells derived from bone marrow stromal cells. J Appl Biomater 1995; 6: 109-16.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Rae T.. The toxicity of metals used in orthopaedic prostheses. An experimental study using cultured human synovial fibroblasts. J Bone Joint Surg 1981; 63 [Br] 435-40.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Rieker C., Windler M., Wyss U.. Metasul, a metalon-metal bearing. Bern: Hans Huber; 1999
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Rogers SD., Howie DW., Graves SE.. et al. In vitro human monocyte response to wear particles of titanium alloy containing vanadium or niobium. J Bone Joint Surg 1997; 79 [Br] 311-5.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Scales JT.. Black staining around titanium alloy prostheses: an orthopaedic enigma. J Bone Joint Surg 1991; 73 [Br] 534-6.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Shettlemore MG., Bundy KJ.. Toxicity measurement of orthopaedic implant alloy degradation products using a bioluminescent bacterial assay. J Biomed Mater Res 1999; 45: 395-403.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Takamura K., Hayashi K., Ishinshi N.. et al. Evaluation of carcinogenecity and chronic toxicity associated with orthopedic implants in mice. J Biomed Mater Res 1994; 28: 583-9.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Wang K.. The use of titanium for medical applications in the USA. Mat Sci Eng 1996; 213: 134-7.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Williams DF.. Definitions in Biomaterials. Oxford: Pergamon; 1987
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Williams DF.. Encyclopaedia of Medical and Dental Materials. Oxford: Pergamon; 1990
    Google Scholar